.  ■  • 

'Mtttfit  P  < 


•  vs  .  ,  -  *  <£ .;  f  . 

•\  ;V-..*;,  .-.  .  /  ; 

5.  £*vrf  £&  as  JlfftjrtiftS* ! 


!p$®rkr,t 


i  lfr.'r  :  ■*A-  0  V  -*--*- 

■f>  :-  '  *  '  '  /.it-  s  ■  qt  ■  '  ; ’  .  -  ©W  . 

i;  or  •••• 


W&lCr-- 


m  SEWARD, 


ON  THE 


KANSAS  AND  NEBRASKA  BILL. 


4  \ 
A 


i  '' 


u 


SENATE  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES,  MAY  26,  1854. 


Mr.  President: 

/  I  rise  with  no  purpose  of  further  resisting  oir’ 
.  even  delaying  the  passage  of  this  bill.  Let  its 
Advocates  have  only  a  little  patience,  and  they 
wnl  soon  reach  the  attainment  of  the  object  for 
which  they  have  struggled  so  earnestly  and 
so  long.  The  sun  has  set  for  the  last  time 
upon  the  guarantied  and  certain  liberties  of 
all  the  unsettled  and  unorganized  portions 
of  the  American  continent  that  lie  within  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  United  States.  To-morrow’s 
sun  will  rise  in  dim  eclipse  over  them.  How 
long  that  obscuration  shall  last,  is  known  only  to 
the  Power  that  directs  and  controls  all  human 
events.  For  myself,  I  know  only  this — that  no 
human  power  can  prevent  its  coming  on,  and  that 
i  ts  passing  off  will  be  hastened  and  secured  by 
others  than  those  now  here,  and  perhaps  by  only 
those  belonging  to  future  generations. 

Sir,  it  would  be  almost  factious' to  offer  farther 
resistance  to  this  measure  here.  Indeed,  success¬ 
ful  resistance  was  never  'expected  to  be  made  in 
this  Hall.  The  Senate  floor  is  an  old  battle  ground, 
on  which  have  been  fought  many  contests,  and 
always,  at  least  since  1820,  with  fortune  adverse 
fo  the  cause  of  equal  and  universal  freedom.  We 
Vrere  only  a  few  here  who  engaged  in  that  cause 
‘.a  the  beginning  of  this  contest.  All  that  we 
could  hope  to  do — all  that  we  did  hope  to  do — 
Was  to  organize  and  to  prepare  the  issue  for  the 
fclouse  of  Representatives,  to  which  the  country 
jrould  look  for  its  decision  as  authoritative,  and 
to  awaken  the  country  that  it  might  be  ready  for 
fhe  appeal  which  would  be  made,  whatever  the 
decision  .  oL  Congress  might  be.  We  are  no 
stronger  now.  Only  fourteen  at  the  first,  it  will 
be  fortunate  if,  among  the  ills  and  accidents 
which  surround  us,  we  shall  maintain  that  num¬ 
ber  to  ‘.he  end. 

We  a$e  on  the  eve  of  the  consummation  of  a 
great  nadonal  transaction — a  transaction  which 
will  close  a  cycle  in  the  history  of  our  country — 
and  it  is  impossible  not  to  desire  to  pause  a'mo- 


ment  and  survey  the  scene  around  us  and  the 
prospect  before  us.  However  obscure  we  may 
individually  be,  our  connection  with  this  great 
transaction  will  perpetuate  our  names  for  the 
praise  or  for  the  censure  of  future  ages,  and  per¬ 
haps  in  regions  far  remote.  If,  then,  we  had  no 
other  for  our  actions  but  that  of  an  honest 

desire  for  a  just  fhme,  we  could  not  be  indifferent 
to  that  scene  and  that  prospect.  But  individual 
interests  and  ambition  sink  into  insignificance  in 
view  of  the  interests  of  our  country  .and  of  man¬ 
kind.  These  interests  awaken,  at  least  in  me,  an 
intense  solicitude. 

It  was  said  by  some,  in  the  beginning,  and  it 
has  been  said  by  others  later  in  this  debate,  that 
it  was  doubtful  whether  it  would  be  the  cause  of 
Slavery  or  the  cause  of  Freedom  that  would  gain 
advantages  from  the  passage  of  this  bill.  I  do  not 
find  it  necessary  to  be  censorious,  nor  even  unjust 
to  others,  in  order  that  my  own  course  may  be  ap¬ 
proved.  I  am  sure  that  the  honorable  Senator  from  \ 
Illinois  [Mr.  Douglas]  did  not  mean  that  the 
slave  States  should  gain  an  advantage  over  the 
free  States,  for  he  disclaimed  it  when  he  intro¬ 
duced  the  bill.  I  belie.ve,  in  all  candor,  that  the 
honorable  Senator  from  Georgia,  [Mr.  Toombs,] 
who  comes  out  at  the  close  of  the  battle  as  one 
of  the  chiefest  leaders  of  the  victorious  party,  is 
sincere  in  declaring  his  own  opinion  that  the 
slave  States  will  gain  no  unjust  advantage  over 
the  free  States,  because  he  'disclaims  it  as  a  tri¬ 
umph  in  their  behalf.  Notwithstanding  all  this, 
however,  what  has  occurred  here  and  in  the 
country,  during  this  contest,  has  compelled  a  con¬ 
viction  that  Slavery  will  gain  something,  and 
Freedom  will  endure  a  severe,  though  I  hope  not 
an  irretrievable  loss.  The  slavehalding  States 
are  passive,  quiet,  content,  and  satisfied  with  the 
prospective  boon,  and  the  free  States  are  excited 
and  alarmed  with  fearful  forebodings  and  appre¬ 
hensions.  The  impatience  for  the  speedy  pas¬ 
sage  of  the  bill  manifested  by  its  friends  betrays 
a  knowledge  that  this  is  the  condition  of  public 
4-  0  ■( 


«■' 


\ 

% 


.L  -  ' 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2018  with  funding  from 

University  of  Illinois  Urbana-Champaign  Alternates 


https://archive.org/details/speechofwilliamh00sewa_3 


sentiment  in  the  free  States.  They  thought  in 
the  beginning  that  it  was  necessary  to  guard  the 
measure  by  inserting  the  Clayton  amendment, 
which  would  exclude  unnaturalized  foreign  inhab¬ 
itants  of  the  Territories  from  the  right  of  suffrage. 
And  now  they  seem  willing,  with  almost  perfect 
unanimity,  to  relinquish  that  safeguard,  rather 
than  to  delay  the  adoption  of  the  principal  meas- 
sure  for  at  most  a  year,  perhaps  for  only  a  week 
or  a  day.  Suppose  that  the  Senate  should  adhere 
to  that  condition,  which  so  lately  was  thought  so 
wise  and  so  important — what  then  ?  The  bill 
could  only  go  back  to  the  House  of  Representa¬ 
tives,  which  must  either  yield  or  insist !  In  the 
one  case  or  in  the  other,  a  decision  in  favor  of  the 
bill  would  be  secured,  for  even  if  the  House  should 
disagree,  the  Senate  would  have  time  to  recede. 
But  the  majority  will  hazard  nothing,  even  on  a 
prospect  so  certain  as  this.  They  will  recede  at 
once,  without  a  moment’s  further  struggle,  from 
the  condition,  and  thus  secure  the  passage  of 
this  bill  now,  to-night.  Why  such  haste  ?  Even 
if  the  question  were  to  go  to  the  country  before 
a  final  decision  here,  what  would  there  be  wrong 
in  that  ?  There  is  no  man  living  who  will  say 
that  the  country  anticipated,  or  that  he  antici¬ 
pated  agitation  of  this  measure  in  Congress, 
when  this  Congress  was  elected,  or  even  when  it 
assembled  in  December  last. 

Under  such  circumstances,  and  in  the  midst  of 
agitatiori,  and  excitement,  and  debatesKit  is  only 
fair  to  say  that  certainly  the  country* ha^  not  de¬ 
cided  in  favor  of  the  bill.  The  refusal,  then,  to 
let  the  question  go  to  the  country,  is  a  conclusive 
proof  that  the  slave  States,  as  represented  here, 
expect  from  the  passage  of  this  bill  what  the  free 
States  insist  that  they  will  lose  by  it,  an  advantage, 
a  material  advantage,  and  not  a  mere  abstraction. 
There  are  men  in  the  slave  States,  as  in  the  free 
States,  who  insist  always  too  pertinaciously  upon 
mere  abstractions.  But  that  is  not  the  policy  of 
the  slave  States  to-day.  They  are  in  earnest  in 
seeking  for  and  securing  an  object,  and  an  im- 
ortant  one.  I  believe  they  are  going  to  have  it. 
do  not  know  how  long  the  advantage  gained 
will  last,  nor  how  great  or  comprehensive  it  will 
be.  Every  Senator  who  agrees  with  me  in  opin¬ 
ion  must  feel  as  I  do — that  under  such  circum¬ 
stances  he  can  forego  nothing  that  can  be  done 
decently,  with  due  respect  to  difference  of  opin¬ 
ion,  and  consistently  with  the  constitutional  and 
settled  rules  of  legislation,  to  place  the  true  mer¬ 
its  of  the  question  before  the  country.  Questions 
sometimes  occur,  which  seem  to  have  two  right 
sides.  Such  were  the  questions  tl^tt  divided  the 
English  nation  between  Pitt  and  Fox — such 
the  contest  between  the  assailant  and  the  defend¬ 
er  of  Quebec.  The  judgment  of  the  world  was 
suspended  by  its  sympathies,  and  seemed  ready 
to  descend  in  favor  of  him  who  should  be  most 
gallant  in  conduct.  And  so,  when  both  fell  with 
equal  chivalry  on  the  same  field,  the  survivors 
united  in  raising  a  common  monument  to  the 
glorious  but  rival  memories  of  Wolfe  and  Mont¬ 
calm.  But  this  contest  involves  a  moral  ques¬ 
tion.  The  slave  States  so  present  it  They 
maintain  that  African  slavery  is  not  erroneous, 
not  unjust,  not  inconsistent  with  the  advancing 


37  %  6  6! 

2  ‘Se.'Zs  ’  i  • 

v  *  '  i '  j 

cause  of  human  nature.  Since  they  so  regard  it, 

I  do  not  expect  to  see  statesmen  representing 
those  States  indifferent  about  a  vindication  of  this 
system  by  the  (Congress  of  the  United  States.  On 
the  other  hand,  we  of  the  free  States  regard  Sla¬ 
very  as  erroneous,  unjust,  oppressive,  and  there¬ 
fore  absolutely  inconsistent  with  the  principles  of 
the  American  Constitution  and  Government. 
Who  will  expect  us  to  be  indifferent  to  the  decis¬ 
ions  of  the  American  people  and  of  mankind  on 
such  an  issue  ? 

Again:  there  is  suspended  on  the  issue  of  this 
contest  the  political  equilibrium  between  the  free 
and  the  slave  States.  It  is  no  ephemeral  ques¬ 
tion,  no  idle  question,  whether  Slavery  shall  go 
on  increasing  its  influence  over  the  central  pow¬ 
er  here,  or  whether  Freedom  shall  gain  the  as¬ 
cendency.  I  do  not  expect  to  see  statesmen  of 
the  slave  States  indifferent  on  so  momentous  a 
question,  and  as  little  can  it  be  expected  that 
those  of  the  free  States  will  betray  their  great 
cause.  And  now  it  remains  for  me  to  declare, 
in  view  of  the  decision  of  this  controversy  so 
near  at  hand,  that  I  have  seen  nothing  and  heard 
nothing  during  its  progress  to  change  the  opin¬ 
ions  which  at  the  earliest  proper  period  I  delib¬ 
erately  expressed.  Certainly,  I  have  not  seen 
the  evidence  then  promised,  that  the  free  States 
would  acquiesce  in  the  measure.  As  certainly, 
too,  I  may  say  that  I  have  not  seen  the  fulfil¬ 
ment  of  the  promise  that  the  history  of  the  last 
thirty  years  would  be  revised,  corrected,  and 
amended,  and  that  it  would  then  appear  that  the 
country,  during  all  that  period,  had  been  resting 
in  prosperity  and  contentment  and  peace,  not  up¬ 
on  a  valid,  constitutional,  and  irrevocable  com¬ 
promise  between  the  slave  States  and  the  free 
States,  but  upon  an  unconstitutional  and  false, 
and  even  infamous,  act  of  Congressional  usurpa¬ 
tion. 

On  the  contrary,  I  am  now,  if  possible,  more 
than  ever  satisfied  that,  after  all  this  debate,  th-e 
history  of  the  country  will  go  down  to  posterity  < 
just  as  it  stood  before,  carrying  to  them  the  even- 
lasting  facts  that  until  1820  the  Congress  of  the 
United  States  legislated  to  prevent  the  introduc¬ 
tion  of  Slavery  into  new  Territories  whenever 
that  object  was  practicable ;  and  that  in  that 
year  they  so  far  modified  that  policy,  undejr 
alarming  apprehensions  of  civil  convulsion,  by  '  1 
constitutional  enactment  in  the  character  of  . 
compact,  ag  to  admit  Missouri  a  new  slave  State 
but  upon  the  express  condition,  stipulated  in 
favor  of  the  free  States,  that  Slavery  should  be 
forever  prohibited  in  all  the  residue  of  the  exist 
ing  and  unorganized  Territories  of  the  United 
States  lying  north  of  the  parallel  of  36°  30/  north 
latitude.  Certainly,  I  find  nothing  to  win  my 
favor  toward  the  bill  in  the  proposition  of  ih«j. 
Senator  from  Maryland,  [Mr.  Pearce,]  to  restore 
the  Clayton  amendment,  which  was  struck  out  in 
the  House  of  Representatives.  So  far  from^oting 
for  that  proposition,  I  shall  vote  against  it  now,  f 
as  I  did  when  it  was  under  consideration  hero 
before,  in  accordance  with  the  opinion  adopted 
as  early  as  any  political  opinions  I  eve^had,  and 
cherished  as  long,  that  the  right  of  Suffrage  is 
not  a  mere  conventional  right,  but  ai  inherent  , 


natural  right,  of  which  no  Government  can  right¬ 
ly  deprive  any  adult  man  who  is  subject  to  its 
authority,  and  obligated  to  its  support. 

I  hold,  moreover,  sir,  that  inasmuch  as.  every 
man  is,  by  force  of  circumstances  beyond  his  own 
control,  a  subject  of  Government  somewhere,  he 
is,  by  the  very  constitution  of  human  society, 
entitled  to  share  equally  in  the  conferring  of  po¬ 
litical  power  on  those  who  wield  it,  it  he  is  not 
disqualified  by  crime;  that  in  a  despotic  Govern¬ 
ment  he  ought  to  be  allowed  arms,  in  a  free  Gov¬ 
ernment  the  ballot  or  the  open  vote,  as  a  means 
of  self-protection  against  unendurable  oppres¬ 
sion.  I  am  not  likely,  therefore,  to  restore  to 
this  bill  an  amendment  which  would  deprive  it 
of  an  important  feature  imposed  upon  it  by  the 
House  of  Representatives,  and  that  one,  perhaps, 
the  only  feature  that  harmonizes  with  my  own 
convictions  of  justice.  It  is  true  that  the  House 
of  Representatives  stipulate  such  suffrage  for 
white  men  as  a  condition  for  opening  it  to  the 
possible  proscription  and  slavery  ot  the  African. 

I  shall  separate  them.  I  shall  vote  for  the  for¬ 
mer,  and  against  the  latter,  glad  to  get  universal 
suffrage  of  white  men,  if  only  that  can  be  gaineu 
now,  and  working  right  on,  full  of  hope  and  con¬ 
fidence,  for  the  prevention  or  the  abrogation  of 
Slavery  in  the  Territories  hereafter. 

Sir,  I  am  surprised  at  the  pertinacity  with 
which  the  honorable  Senator  from  Delaware, 
mine  ancient  and  honorable  friend,  [Mr.  Clayton,] 
perseveres  in  opposing  the  granting  ot  the  right 
of  suffrage  to  the  unnaturalized  foreigner  in  the 
Territories.  Congress  cannot  deny  him  that  right. 
Here  is  the  third  article  of  that  convention  by 
which  Louisiana,  including  Kansas  and  Nebras¬ 
ka,  was  ceded  to  the  United  States. 

«  The  inhabitants  of  the  ceded  territory  shall 
1  be  incorporated  ■  in  the  Union  of  the  United 
‘  States,  and  admitted  as  soon  as  possible,  ac- 
1  cording  to  the  principles  of  the  Federal.  Consti- 
1  tution,  to  the  enjoyment  of  the  rights,  privileges, 

1  and  immunities,  of  citizens  of  the  United  States ; 

1  and  in  the  mean  time  they  shall  be  maintained 
1  and  protected  in  the  free  enjoyment  of  their  lib— 

1  erty,  property,  and  the  religion  they  profess.” 

The  inhabitants  of  Kansas  and  Nebraska  are 
citizens  already,  and  by  force  of  this  treaty  must 
continue  to  be,  and  as  such  to  enjoy  the  right  of 
suffrage,  whatever  laws  you  may  make  to  the 
contrary.  My  opinions  are  well  known,  to  wit. 
That  Slavery  is  not  only  an  evil,  but  a  local  one, 
injurious  and  ultimately  pernicious  to  society, 
wherever  it  exists,  and  in  conflict  with  the  con¬ 
stitutional  principles  of  society  in  this  country.  I 
am  not  willing  to  extend  nor  to  permit  the  exten¬ 
sion  of  that  local  evil  into  regions  now  free  within 
our  empire.  I  know  that  there  are  some  vrlio 
differ  from  me,  and  wTro  regard  the  Constitution 
of  the  United  States  as  an  instrument  which  sanc¬ 
tions  Slavery  as  well  as  Freedom.  But  it  I  could 
admit  a  proposition  so  incongruous  with  the  letter 
and  spirit  of  the  Federal  Constitution,  and  the 
known  sentiments  of  its  illustrious  founders,  and 
so  should  conclude  that  Slavery  was  national,.  I 
must  still  cherish  the  opinion  that  it  is  an  evil ; 
and  because  it  is  a  national  one,  I  am  the  more 
firmly  held  and  bound  to  prevent  an  increase  ot 


it,  tending,  as  I  think  it  manifestly  does,  to  the 
weakening  and  ultimate  overthrow  of  the  Consti¬ 
tution  itself,  and  therefore  to  the  injury  of  all 
mankind.  I  know  there  have  been  States  which 
have  endured  long,  and  achieved  much,  which 
tolerated  Slavery ;  but  that  was  not  the  slavery  of 
caste,  like  African  Slavery.  Such  Slavery  tends 
to  demoralize  equally  the  subjected  race  and  the 
superior  one.  It  has  been  the  absence  of  such 
Slavery  from  Europe  that  has  given  her  nations 
their  superiority  over  other  countries  in  that 
hemisphere.  Shiwery,  wherever  it  exists,  begets 
fear,  and  fear  is  the  parent  of  weakness.  .  What 
is  the  secret  of  that  eternal,  sleepless  anxiety  in 
the  legislative  halls,  and  even  at  the  firesides,  of 
the  slave  States,  always  asking  new  stipulations, 
new  compromises  and  aDrogation  of  compromises, 
new  assumptions  of  power  and  abnegations  of 
power,  but  fear?  It  is  the  apprehension  that, 
even  if  safe  now,  they  will  not  always  or  long,  be 
secure  against  some  invasion  or  some  aggression 
from  the  free  States.  What  is  the  secret  of  the 
humiliating  part  which  proud  old  Spain  is  acting 
at  this  day,  trembling  between  alarms  of  Ameri¬ 
can  intrusion  into  Cuba  on  one  side,  and  Biitish 
dictation  on  the  other,  but  the  fact  that  she  has 
cherished  Slavery  so  long,  and  still  cherishes  it, 
in  the  last  of  her  American  colonial  possessions  ? 
Thus  far,  Kansas  and  Nebraska  are  safe,  under 
the  laws  of  1820,  against  the  introduction  of  this 
element  of  national  debility  and  decline.  The 
bill  before  us,  as  we  are  assured,  contains  a  great 
principle,  a  glorious  principle ;  and  yet  that  prin¬ 
ciple,  when  fully  ascertained,  proves  to  be  noth¬ 
ing  less  than  the  subversion  of  that  security,  not 
only  within  the  Territories  of  Kansas  and  Nebias- 

ka,  but  within  all  the  other  present  and  future  new 
Territories  of  the  United  States.  Thus  it  is. quit® 
clear  that  it  is  not  a  principle  alone  that  is  in¬ 
volved,  but  that  those  who  crowd  this  measure 
with  so  much  zeal  and  earnestness  must  expect 
that  either  Freedom  or  Slavery  shall  gain  some¬ 
thing  by  it  in  those  regions.  The  case,  then, 
stands  thus  in  Kansas  and  Nebraska:  freedom 
may  lose,  but  certainly  can  gain  nothing ;  while 
Slavery  may  gain,  but  as  certainly  can  lose  noth- 

ing.  . 

So  far  as  I  am  concerned,  the  time  for  looking 
on  the  dark  side  has  passed.  I  feel  quite  sure 
that  Slavery  at  most  can  get  nothing  more  than 
Kansas  ;  while  Nebraska,  the  wider  northern  re¬ 
gion,  will,  under  existing  circumstances,  escape, 
for  the  reason  that  fits  soil  and  climate  are  un¬ 
congenial  with  the  staples  of  slave  culture  lire, 
sugar,  cotton,  and  tobacco.  Moreover,  since  the 
public  attention  has  been  so  well  and  so  effectually 
directed  toward  the  subject,  I  cherish  a  hope,  that 
Slavery  may  be  prevented  even  from  gaining  a 
foothold  in  Kansas.  Congress  only  gives  con¬ 
sent.  but  it  does  not  and  cannot  introduce  Sla¬ 
very  there.  Slavery  will  be  embarrassed  by  its 
own  over-grasping  spirit.  No  one,  r  am  suie, 
anticipates  the  possible  re-establishment  of  the 
African  slave  trade.  The  tide  of  emigration  to 
Kansas  is  therefore  to  be  supplied  there,  solely  by 
the  domestic  fountain  of  slave  production.  But 
Slavery  has  also  other  regions  besides  Kansas  to 
be  filled  from  that  fountain.  There  is  all  of  New 


4 


Mexico  and  all  of  Utah  already  within  the  United 
States;  and  then  there  is  Cuba,  that  consumes 
slave  labor  and  life  as  fast  as  any  one  of  the 
slaveholding  States  can  supply  it ;  and  besides 
these  regions,  there  remains  all  of  Mexico  down 
to  the  Isthmus.  The  stream  of  slave  labor  flow¬ 
ing  from  so  small  a  fountain,  and  broken  into 
several  divergent  channels,  will  not  cover  so 
great  a  field;  and  it  is  reasonably  to  be  hoped 
that  the  part  of  it  nearest  to  the  North  Pole  will 
be  the  last  to  be  inundated.  But  African  slave 
emigration  is  to  compete  with  free  emigration  of 
white  men,  and  the  source  of  this  latter  tide  is 
as  ample  as  the  civilization  of  the  two  entire  con¬ 
tinents.  The  honorable  Senator  from  Delaware 
mentioned,  as  if  it  were  a  startling  fact,  that 
twenty  thousand  European  immigrants  arrived 
in  New  York  in  one  month.  Sir,  he  has  stated 
the  fact  with  too  much  moderation.  On  my  re¬ 
turn  to  the  capital  a  day  or  two  ago,  I  met 
twelve  thousand  of  these  immigrants  who  had 
arrived  in  New  York  on  one  morning,  and  who 
had  thronged  the  churches  on  the  following  Sab¬ 
bath,  to  return  thanks  for  deliverance  from  the 
perils  of  the  sea,  and  for  their  arrival  in  the 
land,  not  of  Slavery,  but  of  Liberty.  I  also 
thank  God  for  their  escape,  and  for  their  com¬ 
ing.  They  are  now  on  their  way  westward,  and 
the  news  of  the  passage  of  this  bill,  preceding 
them,  will  speed  many  of  them  towards  Kansas 
and  Nebraska.  Such  arrivals  are  not  extraordi¬ 
nary — they  occur  almost  every  week ;  and  the 
immigration  from  Germany,  from  Great  Britain, 
and  from  Norway,  and  from  Sweden,  during  the 
European  war,  will  rise  to  six  or  seven  hundred 
thousand  souls  in  a  year.  And  with  this  tide  is 
to  be  mingled  one  rapidly  swelling  from  Asia 
and  from  the  islands  of  the  South  Seas.  All  the 
immigrants,  under  this  bill  as  the  House  of  Rep¬ 
resentatives  overruling  you  have  ordered,  will  be 
good,  loyal,  Liberty-loving,  Slavery-fearing  citi¬ 
zens.  Come  on,  then,  gentlemen  of  the  slave 
States.  Since  there  is  no  escaping  your  chal¬ 
lenge,  I  accept  it  in  behalf  of  the  cause  of  Free¬ 
dom.  We  will  engage  in  competition  for  the 
virgin  soil  of  Kansas,  and  God  give  the  victory 
to  the  side  which  is  stronger  in  numbers  as  it  is 
in  right. 

There  are,  however,  earnest  advocates  of  this 
bill,  who  do  not  expect,  and  who,  I  suppose,  do 
not  desire,  that  Slavery  shall  gain  possession  of 
Nebraska.  What  do  they  expect  to  gain  ?  The 
honorable  Senator  from  Indiana  [Mr.  Pettit] 
says  that  by  thus  obliterating  the  Missouri  Com¬ 
promise  restriction,  they  will  gain  a  tabula  rasa , 
on  which  the  inhabitants  of  Kansas  and  Nebraska 
may  write  whatever  they  will.  This  is  the  great 
principle  of  the  bill,  as  he  understands  it.  Well, 
what  gain  is  there  in  that?  You  obliterate  a 
Constitution  of  Freedom.  If  they  write  a  new 
Constitution  of  Freedom,  can  the  new  be  better 
than  the  old  ?  If  they  write  a  Constitution  of 
Slavery,  will  it  not  be  a  worse  one  ?  I  ask  the 
honorable  Senator  that !  But  the  honorable  Sen¬ 
ator  says  that  the  people  of  Nebraska  will  have 
the  privilege  of  establishing  institutions  for  them¬ 
selves.  They  have  now  the  privilege  of  estab¬ 
lishing  free  institutions.  Is  it  a  privilege,  then, 


to  establish  Slavery?  If  so,  what  a  mockery  are 
all  our  Constitutions,  which  prevent  the  inhabit¬ 
ants  from  capriciously  subverting  free  institu¬ 
tions  and  establishing  institutions  of  Slavery  ? 
Sir,  it  is  a  sophism,  a  subtlety,  to  talk  of  con¬ 
ferring  upon  a  country,  already  secure  in  the 
blessings  of  Freedom,  the  power  of  self-destruc¬ 
tion. 

What  mankind  everywhere  want,  is  not  the  re¬ 
moval  of  the  Constitutions  of  Freedom  which 
they  have,  that  they  may  make  at  their  pleasure 
Constitutions  of  Slavery  or  of  Freedom,  but  the 
privilege  of  Retaining  Constitutions  of  Freedom 
when  they  already  have  them,  and  the  removal 
of  Constitutions  of  Slavery  when  they  have  them, 
that  they  may  establish  Constitutions  of  Freedom 
in  their  place.  We  hold  on  tenaciously  to  all 
existing  Constitutions  of  Freedom.  Who  de¬ 
nounces  any  man  for  diligently  adhering  to  such 
Constitutions?  Who  would  dare  to  denounce 
any  one  for  disloyalty  to  our  existing  Constitu¬ 
tions,  if  they  were  Constitutions  of  Despotism  and 
Slavery?  But  it  is  supposed  by  some  that  this 
principle  is  less  important  in  regard  to  Kansas 
and  Nebraska  than  as  a  general  one — a  general 
principle  applicable  to  all  other  present  and  fu¬ 
ture  Territories  of  the  United  States.  Do  honor¬ 
able  Senators  then  indeed  suppose  they  are  es¬ 
tablishing  a  principle  at  all  ?  If  so,  I  think  they 
egregiously  err,  whether  the  principle  is  either 
good  or  bad,  right  or  wrong.  They  are  not  estab¬ 
lishing  it,  and  cannot  establish  it  in  this  way.  You 
subvert  one  law  capriciously,  by  making  another 
law  in  its  place.  That  is  all.  Will  your  luvv 
have  any  more  weight,  authority,  solemnity,  or 
binding  force  on  future  Congresses,  than  the  first 
had  ?  You  abrogate  the  law  of  your  predeces¬ 
sors — others  will  have  equal  power  and  equal 
liberty  to  abrogate  yours.  Yojj  allow  no  barriers 
around  the  old  law,  to  protect  it  from  abrogation. 
You  erect  none  around  your  new  law,  to  stay  the 
hand  of  future  innovators. 

On  what  ground  do  you  expect  the  new  law  to 
stand  ?  If  you  are  candid,  you  will  confess  that 
you  rest  your  assumption  on  the  ground  that  the 
free  States  will  never  agitate  repeal,  but  always 
acquiesce.  It  may  be  that  you  are  right.  I  am 
not  going  to  predict  the  course  of  the  free  States. 
I  claim  no  authority  to  speak  for  them,  and  still 
less  to  say  what  they  will  do.  But  I  may  venture 
to  say,  that  if  they  shall  not  repeal  this  law,  it 
will  not  be  because  they  are  not  strong  enough 
to  do  it.  They  have  power  in  the  House  of  Rep¬ 
resentatives  greater  than  that  of  the  slave  States, 
and,  when  they  choose  to  exercise  it,  a  power 
greater  even  here  in  the  Senate.  The  free  States 
are  not  dull  scholars,  even  in  practical  political 
strategy.  When  you  shall  have  taught  them  that 
a  compromise  law  establishing  Freedom  can  be 
abrogated,  and  the  Union  nevertheless  stand,  you 
will ''have  let  them  into  another  secret,  namely: 
that  a  law  permitting  or  establishing  Slavery  can 
be  repealed,  and  the  Union  nevertheless  remain 
firm.  If  you  inquire  why  they  do  not  stand  by 
their  rights  and  their  interests  more  firmly,  I  will 
tell  you  to  the  best  of  my  ability.  It  is  because 
they  are  conscious  of  their  strength,  and,  there- 
!  fore,  unsuspecting,  and  slow  to  apprehend  dan- 


% 


5 


ger.  The  reason  why  you  prevail  in  so  many 
contests,  is  because  you  are  in  perpetual  fear. 

There  cannot  be  a  convocation  of  Abolitionists, 
however  impracticable,  in  Faneuil  Hall  or  the 
Tabernacle,  though  it  consists  of  men  and  women 
who  have  separated  themselves  from  all  effective 
political  parties,  and  who  have  renounced  all  po¬ 
litical  agencies,  even  though  they  resolve  that 
they  will  vote  for  nobody,  not  even  for  themselves, 
to  carry  out  their  purposes,  and  though  they  prac¬ 
tice  on  that  resolution,  but  you  take  alarm,  and 
your  agitation  renders  necessary  such  compro¬ 
mises  as  those  of  1820  and  of  1850.  We  are  young 
in  the  arts  of  politics  ;  you  are  old.  We  are  strong; 
yiu  are  weak.  We  are,  therefore,  over-confident, 
careless,  and  indifferent ;  you  are  vigilant  and 
active.  These  are  all  traits  that  redound  to  your 
praise.  They  are  mentioned  not  in  your  dispar¬ 
agement.  1  say  only  that  there  may  be  an  extent 
of  intervention,  of  aggression,  on  your  side,  which 
may  induce  the  North,  at  some  time,  either  in  this 
or  in  some  future  generation,  to  adopt  your  tactics 
and  follow  your  example.  Remember  now,  that 
by  unanimous  consent,  this  new  law  will  be  a 
repealable  statute,  exposed  to  all  the  chances  of 
the  Missouri  compromise.  It  stands  an  infinitely 
worse  chance  of  endurance  than  that  compromise 
did. 

The  Missouri  compromise  was  a  transaction 
which  wise,  learned,  patriotic  statesmen  agreed 
to  surround  and  fortify  with  the  principles  of  a 
compact  for  mutual  considerations,  passed  and 
executed,  and  therefore,  although  notirrepealable 
in  fact,  yet  irrepealable  in  honor  and  conscience, 
and  down  at  least  until  this  very  session  of  the 
Congress  of  the  United  States,  it  has  had  the 
force  and  authority  not  merely  of  an  act  of  Con¬ 
gress,  but  of  a  covenant  between  the  free  States 
and  the  slave  States,  scarcely  less  sacred  than  the 
Constitution  itself.  Now,  then,  who  are  your 
contracting  parties  in  the  law  establishing  Gov¬ 
ernments  in  Kansas  and  Nebraska,  and  abroga¬ 
ting  the  Missouri  compromise?  What  are  the 
equivalents  in  this  law  ?  What  has  the  North 
given,  and  what  has  the  South  got  back,  that 
makes  this  a  contract?  Who  pretends  that  it  is 
anything  more  than  an  ordinary  act  of  ordinary 
legislation  ?  If,  then,  a  law  which  has  all  the 
forms  and  solemnities  recognised  by  common 
consent  as  a  compact,  and  is  covered  with  tra¬ 
ditions,  cannot  stand  amid  this  shuffling  of  this 
balance  between  the  free  States  and  the  slave 
States,  tell  me  what  chance  this  new  law  that 
you  are  passing  will  have  ? 

You  are,  moreover,  setting  a  precedent  which 
abrogates  all  compromises.  Four  years  ago,  you 
obtained  the  consent  of  a  portion  of  the  free 
States — enough  to  render  the  effort  at  immediate 
‘repeal  or  resistance  alike  impossible — to  what  we 
regarded  as  an  unconstitutional  act  for  the  sur¬ 
render  of  fugitive  slaves.  That  was  declared,  by 
the  common  consent  of  the  persons  acting  in  the 
name  of  the  two  parties,  the  slave  States  and  the 
free  States  in  Congress,  an  irrepealable  law — not 
even  to  be  questioned,  although  it  violated  the 
Constitution.  In  establishing  this  new  principle, 
v  you  expose  that  law  also  to  the  chances  of  repeal. 
You  not  only  so  expose  the  fugitive  slave  law, 


but  there  is  no  solemnity  about  the  articles  for 
the  annexation  of  Texas  to  the  United  States, 
which  does  not  hang  about  the  Missouri  compro¬ 
mise  ;  and  when  you  have  shown  that  the  Mis¬ 
souri  compromise  can  be  repealed,  then  the  ar¬ 
ticles  for  the  annexation  of  Texas  are  subject  to 
the  will  and  pleasure  and  the  caprice  of  a  tem¬ 
porary  majority  in  Congress.  Do  you,  then,  ex¬ 
pect  that  the  free  States  are  to  observe  compacts, 
and  you  to  be  at  liberty  to  break  them  ;  that  they 
are  to  submit  to  laws  and  leave  them  on  the 
statute-book,  however  unconstitutional  and  how¬ 
ever  grevious,  and  that  you  are  to  rest  under  no 
such  obligation  ?  I  think  it  is  not  a  reasonable 
expectation.  Say,  then,  who  from  the  North  will 
be  bound  to  admit  Kansas,  when  Kansas  shall 
come  in  here,  if  she  shall  come  as  a  slave 
State  ? 

The  honorable  Senator  from  Georgia,  [Mr. 
Toombs,]  and  I  know  he  is  as  sincere  as  he  is 
ardent,  savs  if  he  shall  be  here  when  Kansas 
comes  as  a  free  State,  he  will  vote  for  her  admis¬ 
sion.  I  doubt  not  that  he  would ;  but  he  will 
not  be  here,  for  the  verv  reason,  if  there  be  no 
other,  that  he  would  vote  that  way.  When  Oregon 
or  Minnesota  shall  come  here  for  admission — -with¬ 
in  one  year,  or  two  yeai'S,  or  three  years  from 
this  time — we  shall  then  see  what  your  new  prin¬ 
ciple  is  worth  in  its  obligation  upon  the  slave¬ 
holding  States.  No;  you  establish  no  principle, 
you  only  abrogate  a  principle  which  was  estab¬ 
lished  for  your  own  security  as  well  as  ours ;  and 
while  you  think  }'Ou  are  abnegating  and  resigning 
all  power  and  all  authority  on  this  subject  into  the 
hands  of  the  people  of  the  Territories,  you  are 
only  getting  over  a  difficulty  in  settling  this  ques¬ 
tion  in  the  organization  of  two  new  Territories, 
by  postponing  it  till  they  come  here  to  be  admit¬ 
ted  as  States,  slave  or  free. 

Sir,  in  saying  that  your  new  principle  will  not 
be  established  by  this  bill,  I  reason  from  obvious, 
clear,  well-settled  principles  of  human  nature. 
Slavery  and  Freedom  are  antagonistical  elements 
in  this  country.  The  founders  of  the  Constitu¬ 
tion  framed  it  with  a  knowledge  of  that  antag¬ 
onism,  and  suffered  it  to  continue,  that  it  might 
work  out  its  own  ends.  There  is  a  commercial 
antagonism,  an  irreconcilable  one,  between  the 
systems  of  free  labor  and  slave  labor.  They 
have  been  at  war  with  each  other  ever  since  the 
Government  was  established,  and  that  war  is  to 
continue  forever.  The  contest,  when  it  ripens 
between  these  two  antagonistic  elements,  is  to 
be  settled  somewhere ;  it  is  to  be  settled  in  the 
seat  of  central  power,  in  the  Federal  Legislature. 
The  Constitution  makes  it  the  duty  of  the  central 
Government  to  determine  questions  as  often  as 
they  shall  arise  in  favor  of  one  or  the  other  party, 
and  refers  the  decision  of  them  to  the  majority 
of  the  votes  in  the  two  Houses  of  Congress.  It 
will  come  back  here,  then,  in  spite  of  all  the  ef¬ 
forts  to  escape  from  it. 

This  antagonism  must  end  either  in  a  separa¬ 
tion  of  the  antagonistic  parties — the  slaveholding 
States  and  the  free  States — or,  secondly,  in  the 
complete  establishment  of  the  influence  of  the 
slave  power  over  the  free — or  else,  on  the  other 
hand,  in  the  establishment  of  the  superior  influv 


6 


ence  of  Freedom  over  the  interests  of  Slavery.  It 
will  not  be  terminated  by  a  voluntary  secession 
of  either  party.  Commercial  interests  bind  the 
slave  States  and  the  free  States  together  in  links 
of  gold  that  are  riveted  with  iron,  and  they  can¬ 
not  be  broken  by  passion  or  by  ambition.  Either 
party  will  submit  to  the  ascendency  of  the  other, 
rather  than  yield  the  commercial  advantages  of 
this  Union.  Political  ties  bind  the  Union  togeth¬ 
er — a  common  necessity,  and  not  merely  a  com¬ 
mon  necessity,  but  the  common  interests  of  em¬ 
pire — of  such  enipire  as  the  world  has  never 
before  seen.  The  control  of  the  national  power 
is  the  control  of  the  great  Western  Continent ; 
and  the  control  of  this  continent  is  to  be  in  a 
very  few  years  the  controlling  influence  in  the 
world.  Who  is  there,  North,  that  hates  Slavery 
so  much,  or  who,  South,  that  hates  emancipation 
so  intensely,  that  he  can  attempt,  with  any  hope 
of  success,  to  break  a  Union  thus  forged  and 
welded  together?  I  have  always  heard,  with 
equal  pity  and  disgust,  threats  of  disunion  in  the 
free  States,  and  similar  threats  in  the  slavchold- 
ing  States.  I  know  that  men  may  rave  in  the 
heat  of  passion,  and  under  great  political  excite¬ 
ment;  but  I  know  that  when  it  comes  to  a  ques¬ 
tion  whether  this  Union  shall  stand,  either  wdth 
Freedom  or  with  Slavery,  the  masses  will  uphold 
it,  and  it  will  stand  until  some  inherent  vice  in 
its  Constitution,  not  yet  disclosed,  shall  cause  its 
dissolution.  Now,  entertaining  these  opinions, 
there  are  for  me  only  two  alternatives,  viz:  either 
to  let  Slavery  gain  unlimited  sway,  or  so  to  exert 
what  little  power  and  influence  I  may  have,  as  to 
secure,  if  I  can,  the  ultimate  predominance  of 
Freedom. 

In  doing  this,  I  do  no  more  than  those  who  be¬ 
lieve  the  Slave  Power  is  rightest,  wisest,  and 
best,  are  doing,  and  will  continue  to  do,  with  my 
free  consent,  to  establish  its  complete  supremacy. 
If  they  shall  succeed,  I  still  shall  be,  as  I  have 
been,  a  loyal  citizen.  If  we  succeed,  I  know 
they  will  be  loyal  also,  because  it  will  be  safest, 
wisest,  and  best,  for  them  to  be  so.  The  question 
is  one,  not  of  a  day,  or  of  a  year,  but  of  many 
years,  and,  for  aught  I  know,  many  generations. 
Like  all  other  great  political  questions,  it  will  be 
attended  sometimes  by  excitement,  sometimes  bv 
passion,  and  sometimes,  perhaps,  even  by  fac¬ 
tion  ;  but  it  is  sure  to  be  settled  in  a  constitu¬ 
tional  way,  without  any  violent  shock  to  society, 
or  to  any  of  its  great  intei*ests.  It  is,  moreover, 
sure  to  be  settled  rightly ;  because  it  will  be  set¬ 
tled  under  the  benign  influences  of  Republican¬ 
ism  and  Christianity,  according  to  the  principles 
of  truth  and  justice,  as  ascertained  by  human 
reason.  In  pursuing  such  a  course,  it  seems  to 
me  obviously  as  wise  as  it  is  necessarj^  to  save 
all  existing  lawrs  and  Constitutions  which  are 
conservative  of  Freedom,  and  to  permit,  as  far 
as  possible,  the  establishment  of  no  new  ones  in 
favor  of  Slavery  ;  and  thus  to  turn  away  the 
thoughts  of  the  States  which  tolerate  Slavery 
from  political  efforts  to  perpetuate  what  in  its 
nature  cannot  be  perpetual,  to  the  more  wise  and 
benign  policy  of  emancipation. 

This,  in  my  humble  judgment,  is  the  simple, 
easy  path  ol  duty  for  the  American  statesman.  I 


will  not  contemplate  that  other  alternative — the 
greater  ascendency  of  the  Slave  Power.  I  believe 
that  if  it  ever  shall  come,  the  voice  of  Freedom 
will  cease  to  be  heard  in  these  Halls,  whatever 
may  be  the  evils  and  dangers  which  Slavery  shall 
produce.  I  say  this  without  disrespect  for  Rep¬ 
resentatives  of  slave  States,  and  I  say  it  because 
the  rights  of  petition  and  of  debate  on  that 
subject  are  effectually  suppressed  —  necessarily 
suppressed  —  in  all  the  slave  States,  and  be¬ 
cause  they  are  not  always  held  in  reverence 
even  now,  in  the  two  Houses  of  Congress. 
When  freedom  of  speech  on  a  subject  of  such 
vital  interest  shall  have  ceased  to  exist  in  Con¬ 
gress,  then  I  shall  expect  to  see  Slavery  not  only 
luxuriating  in  all  new  Territories,  but  stealthily 
creeping  even  into  the  free  States  themselves. 
Believing  this,  and  believing,  also,  that  complete 
responsibility  of  the  Government  to  the  people  is 
essential  to  public  and  private  safety,  and  that 
decline  and  ruin  are  sure  to  follow,  always,  on 
the  train  of  Slavery,  I  am  sure  that  this  will  be 
no  longer  a  land  of  Freedom  and  constitutional 
liberty  when  Slavery  shall  have  thus  become 
paramount.  Avferre  trucidare  falsis  nominibus  im- 
perium  atque  ubi  soUtudinem  faciunt  pciccm  appel¬ 
lant. 

Sir,  I  have  always  said  that  I  should  not  de- 
spond,  even  if  this  fearful  measure  should  be 
effected ;  nor  do  I  now  despond.  Although,  rea¬ 
soning  from  my  present  convictions,  I  should  not 
havh  voted  for  the  compromise  of  1820,  I  have 
labored,  in  the  very  spirit  of  those  who  establish¬ 
ed  it,  to  save  the  landmark  of  Freedom  which  it 
assigned.  I  have  not  spoken  irreverently,  even 
of  the  compromise  of  1850,  which,  as  all  men 
knoAv,  I  opposed  earnestly  and  with  diligence. 
Nevertheless,  I  have  always  preferred  the  com¬ 
promises  of  the  Constitution,  and  have  wanted  no 
others.  I  feared  all  others.  This  was  a  leading 
principle  of  the  great  statesman  of  the  South, 
[Mr.  Calhoun.]  Said  he  : 

££  I  see  my  way  in  the  Constitution ;  I  cannot 
£  in  a  compromise.  A  compromise  is  but  an  act 
£  of  Congress.  It  may  be  overruled  at  any  time. 
1  It  gives  us  no  security.  But  the  Constitution  is 
£  a  statute.  It  is  a  rock  on  which  we  can  stand, 
£  and  on  which  we  can  meet  our  friends  from  the 
‘  non-slaveholding  States.  It  is  a  firm  and  stable 
1  ground,  on  which  we  can  better  stand  in  oppo- 
£  sition  to  fanaticism  than  on  the  shifting  sands 
£  of  compromise.  Let  us  be  done  with  compro- 
‘  mises.  Let  us  go  back  and  stand  upon  the 
£  Constitution.” 

I  stood  upon  this  ground  in  1850,  defending 
Freedom  upon  it  as  Mr.  Calhoun  did  in  defending 
Slavery.  I  was  overruled  then,  and  I  have  wait¬ 
ed  since  without  proposing  to  abrogate  any  com¬ 
promises. 

It  has  been  no  proposition  of  mine  to  abrogate 
them  now ;  but  the  proposition  has  come  from 
another  quarter — from  an  adverse  one.  It  is 
about  to  prevail.  The  shifting  sands  of  compro¬ 
mise  are  passing  from  under  ni}r  feet,  and  they 
are  now,  without  agency  of  my  own,  taking  hold 
again  on  the  rock  of  the  Constitution.  It  shall 
be  no  fault  of  mine  if  they  do  not  remain  firm. 
This  seems  to  me  auspicious  of  better  days  and 


7 


wiser  legislation.  Through  all  the  darkness  and 

‘he  ?resent  h0>“-.  bright  stars  are  break- 
"  that  ‘"spire  me  with  hope,  and  excite  me  to 
perseverance.  They  show  that  the  day  of  com 
promises  has  passed  forever,  and  that  hencefor¬ 
ward  all  great  questions  between  Freedom  and 
&la\  ery  legitimately  coming  here— and  none  other 
can  come  shall  be  decided,  as  they  ought  to  be 
upon  their  merits,  by  a  fair  exercise  of  legislative 

power,  and  not  by  bargains  of  equivocal  pn  deuce 
if  not  of  doubtful  morality.  1  uuencc, 

The  House  of  Representatives  has,  and  it  *1 
ways  will  have,  an  increasing  majority  of  mem' 
bers  from  the  free  States.  On  this  occasion  tlmt 
House  has  not  been  altogether  faithless  to  the  in 
erests  of  the  free  States ;  for  although  i  has 
taken  away  the  charter  of  Freedom  from  KanS^ 
u  .Nebraska,  it  has  at  the  same  time  told  this 
proud  body,  in  language  which  compels  acqu  es 
cence,  that  in  submitting  the  question  of  it!  res 
toration,  it  would  submit  it  not  merely  to  inter 

TSentoriZeni’  bVT°  alien  iDhabitants  of  the' 
eriitones  also.  So  the  great  interests  of  human 

Rj  are,  after  all,  thanks  to  the  House  of  Rmire 

sentatives,  and  thanks  to  God,  submitted  to  the 

voice  of  human  nature. 

Sir,  I  see  one  more  sign  of  hope.  The  aronf 
support  of  Slavery  in  the  South  has  been  its 
alliance  with  the  Democratic  party  of  the  North 
By  means  of  that  alliance  it  obtained  paramount 
influence  in  this  Government  about  the  year  1800 


which,  from  that  time  to  this,  with  but  few  and 
slight  interruptions,  it  has  maintained.  While 
Demociacy  in  the  North  has  thus  been  surmnrt 
mg  Slavery  in  the  South,  the  people  of  the  North 
lave  been  learning  more  profoundly  the  princi 
pies  of  republicanism  and  of  free  government  It 
is  an  extraordinary  circumstance,  which  you  sir 
the  present  occupant  of  the  chair,  [Mr.  Sim  art  1 

wh^n  T6  Wiil  n0t  gainsaT;  that  at  this  moment 

ence of  the  fIT"  a  m°re  comPIete  diverg-’ 
ence  ot  the  Federal  Government  in  favor  of  Sla- 

ipfl  ?ia-n  6,Ver  before>  t}ie  sentiment  of  Universal 

imposed  upon  them.  That  party  perseveres  as 
indeed  it  must,  by  reason  of  its  veiy  eouTSon 

Z  hatrvce’  and  thus  comes  int0  closer  con- 
fl  ct  with  elements  of  true  Democracy,  and  for 

that  reason  is  destined  to  lose,  and  is  fast  losing 
t  e  power  which  it  has  held  so  firmly  and  so 
n^‘,  That  power  will  not  be  restored  until  the 
principle  established  here  now  shall  be  reversed 
and  a  Constitution  shall  be  given  not  onlv  to 
Kansas  and  Nebraska,  but  also  to  every  other 

ZTlat  IS  ,WhiCh  Wi"  be  not  a 

sal,  ^  U“™- 


Buell  &  Blanchard,  Printers,  Washington,  D.  C. 


.M 

■ 

\  ■ 

> 


■ 

' 

■ 

i  »  "  ■  v  j  ■  'i-ii  ,;- 

. 

.  ■ 


'  ;•■  '  ■  «  r-v 

mmf 

)  .1  -  '■  ' 

‘  a  •  ■  '\  . . 

’ 


1  ' 


;  Vi 


■ 

. 


* 

• 

<  :v ''  L  (' 

f- 


'  •»  y: '  ; 


